Skip to main content

About your Search

20121201
20121201
STATION
FBC 13
CNNW 7
CSPAN 7
MSNBCW 6
CSPAN2 4
KQED (PBS) 4
SFGTV 2
CNBC 1
COM 1
KCSM (PBS) 1
KPIX (CBS) 1
KQEH (PBS) 1
KRCB (PBS) 1
KTVU (FOX) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 68
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 69 (some duplicates have been removed)
:00 on c-span. >> former congressional leaders discuss what washington learned from the 1990 deficit agreement that eventually helped frame the federal budget into surplus. speakers include tom fully. this is just under three hours of. >> ok. welcome. i am the director of public administration program. i want to welcome you to the session, which we are calling looking back to move a forward. this is co-sponsored by george mason university and the bipartisan policy center. it is our pleasure to put this on and to recognize with all the frenzy about the fiscal cliff that we have a history. some of the history is successful in resolving deep seated hard choices. that is will we will look back and talk about today and see whether we can learn any lessons from the experience. we will go over the detailed program in a few minutes. i want to introduce our keynote speaker tom davis. he has covered many basis. he was the county executive of fairfax county. he was the representative to congress and became a chair and it did many important hearings and remains very active as a speaker and a pol
with the deficit and by the way, we got 2.7% economic growth, which people were jumping up clapping about the markets were, but that's still pretty lousy. >> all of that inventory build. >> that won't happen again u ben stein? >> one reason to raise taxes we have a 1 trillion dollar deficit, but i agree with charlie, we've got to cut this noncess out how we need 50 billion of extra stimulus. look, we're running 3 billion a day of deficit spending, we don't even know if deficit spending is stimulative. we don't have to prove that that's stimulative. we're running such a huge deficit. unless he's a poker player and this is a bid to throw us off pace, that's not a serious proposal. we're not dealing with this seriously at 1600 pennsylvania avenue and he owes the population a lot more than he's showing. >> neil: adam, i'm worried that they make a christmas tree out of this and throwing more and more ornaments because it's the next legislation that we're cobbling together we might as well put some spending in there. in this case, a minimum of 50 billion others like chuck schumer talked not try
on the unfunded obligations. we want to stop the spending problem so we can fix the deficit. we want to get people back to work, which is why again, we take the position that raising tax rates is absolutely not something that helps get people back to work. >> what was the importance of that, rather than just going ahead with visas that you agree are very, very important? >> well, again, what we believe is this was the first step forward in terms of trying to address the need for modernization in our visa laws. and we have a system of lottery that, frankly, i think, is properly replaced with a system that rewards those who want to come here to help create jobs and help get our economy back on track. so it's very much, i think, in sync with our priority of helping americans get back to work, helping create more jobs for more americans. >> democrats have now said after your response towards the thee house's proposal that ball is now in your court, that the onus is on you to put forth a proposal. is the ball in the republicans' court now? >> well, we remain committed at all -- at all instances to enga
capitol hill. then eric cantor response of the lighthouse deficit reduction package. later, nancy pelosi addresses the fiscal cliff and middle- class tax cuts. president obama talked about the so-called fiscal cliff and his proposal to end of the bush tax cuts on those earning more than two and a $50,000. ed -- more than $250,000. ["hail to the chief" plays] please have a seat. have a seat. relax for a second. it is good to see all of you. hello. it is good to be back in pennsylvania. it is good to be right here. i want to thank michael, robert, and the investor, joel glickman for hosting me today and giving me a great tour. stand up so everybody can see you, guys. [cheers and applause] there you go. we have a couple of outstanding members of congress here. [cheers and applause] now, i just finished getting a tour of the workshop. i have to say it makes me wish that joel invented this stuff sooner when i was a kid. back then, you couldn't build a roller coaster out of your erector set. i got a chance to meet some of the folks who have been working around the clock to keep up with the chr
their bills. let's remember where this deficit came from. it came from the iraq war run off budget. it came from a financial crisis that rewarded a lot of executives who are still paying low capital gains tax. >> there's a fabulous article on the front page of "investor's business daily" which i recommend to you. a fabulous article. i'm going to talk about it on tomorrow's radio show about the benefits of the bush tax cuts which by the way generated higher revenues. let's not go there tonight. >> for who, though? >> for everybody. in fact, the middle class -- >> that's why median wages actually dropped this year? >> just look at the numbers that obama uses. if you repeal the top tax rates you're supposed to make 800 billion. if you repeal the whole bill you're supposed to lose 4.5 trillion. it all went to the middle class. i got to challenge your facts on that. that went to the middle class. but do you think right now that there is a chance, i mean responding to what peter said, do you think that obama is going to cold shoulder the gop? here's why i'm saying this. let me just go one more th
on that? we did not have the system of the budget deficits what makes it so much harder and just to sort of duty had enough, it is the persistence of trade deficit least not have one and now we do and that is a big drag on the economy. which hasn't been better actually the trade deficit is actually significantly down but not all. we have had some that have become more competitive that is the front on which we need to work. the political debate hasn't kept up with the reality it's no longer the quarter of that anymore. it's the broadest of countries some that need to be worked on and the next president isn't just china bashing but what do we need to do have a world that is everybody trying to run a trade surplus which the government believes it is possible. [laughter] >> then there is this issue of trade and income inequality. and there's a similar level that presumably had relatively little to do with the distribution. if you make -- canada sends assembled cars back to the united states that is and when to be making a big difference to the deficiency. now we do a lot in the countries tha
knock down the deficit is good. >> okay, but john, what happens to the states. we are finding out that california is signing up for powerball because of the revenues that they get. is it bad for states. >> it is really bad for states. wayne has much chance of winning the lottery as geth through a comment without johnathon interrupting. >> zero. >> and the problem you have with this. this could be a billion dollar jack mots and huge and going to kill the state lottos and in the stouthern states. they were sold as a way of funding education . that didn't happen. they are dependent on the general fund. cash strapped states that depend on the lotto, you will cripple the funding for the states is it a bad idea. it robs peter to pay paul. >> johnathon, you wouldn't be cutting wayne off. >> i am keeping quiet. wayne has to check his calculator. 580 million jackpot would pate zero.zero 3 percent of the national debt. we don't need a new plan to pay off the debt. we need a new philosophy and not exasbrate the debt. in a fully free society a lottery is a great way to fund the because it is
-half in revenue and taxes. that leaves us with the deficit of one. that is the deficit. sizable it is. this will be the president's fourth for which he is personally responsible, fourth deficit in excess of a trillion dollars. president obama wants to plug that trillion dollars hole by raising taxes on household incomes, as we all know that have incomes over $250,000. the top 2%. that would bring in $802 million, $82 billion. that's about 8% of that deficit. so does that suggest we have a tax problem or, perhaps, a spending problem? think about this. taxpayers making more than $250,000 representing the top 2% paid more than 46% of all texas. that would seem like a pretty fair deal to most of us, but the president says it is not fair. we don't know what that number is. how much should it be? and contrary to what the president would have you believe as he campaigns untack sites all around the country and against the wealthy, he's doing a lot of that. the bush tax rates are not the root of our problems. in fact, individual tax payments rose, get this, $2,303,000,000,000 or 26%. over the
be appreciated for that. it did put us on a path to getting our deficit in order. people have talked about the need for leadership. i think that the surprise of newt gingrich and his departure in the circumstance, where the administration had passed the majority of his party and the majority of the democrats get together and do this, everyone knows about this. it was clearly putting a personal agenda ahead of a governmental one at that point. my lesson is to be alert and keep your eyes open. third, i would say something you were expecting is not happening. what happened to us was the effect on the budget -- it was that the energy crisis spike. we have spent a lot of time working on energy taxes or the alternative of energy taxes. .. >> debt is higher now than since world war, and 90% of the debt was owned to the americans, and the reason that the pressures don't seem as real as they are, and here, i want to be clear that the pressures are not next year and the year after. the pressures are between now and 2020 or even later is that europe has been in such a bad shape. that is, when you tie
and afghanistan, shaving another trillion off of the deficit. that gets us to around 4 trillion in deficit over the next ten years. we are almost at 5 trillion in deficit reduction. as they sign the game shows, that's not all. the white house is also asking for about 200 billion in stimulus. according to the weekly standard, when senate minority leader mitch mcconnell saw the proposal, he quote, burst into laughter. he literally lol 'd. >> i've been very guarded in what i wanted to say. i didn't want it make it harder for me it say or the president or members of both parties to find common ground. but when i come out the day after the election and make it clear that republicans will put revenue on the table, i took a great risk. and then the white house spends three weeks trying to develop a proposal and they send one up here, the calls for $1.6 trillion of new taxes, calls for not even $400 billion in cuts, and they want to have extra spending, that's actually greater than the amount they are willing to cut. i mean, it's -- it was not a serious proposal. and so, right now, we're almost nowhere
that if they couldn't compromise on a deficit and revenue plan our economy would krafernlt turns out they couldn't compromise. so here's what they did. in order to force themselves to work together and compromise they concocted a catastrophic penalty that would itself crash our economy. brilliant! put it another way. if there is an asteroid headed towards the earth. we made it and fired it at ourselves. (laughter) because otherwise we would never have done the hard work required to protect ourselves from the asteroid. so the asteroid is comings. where are we at. >> if we're serious about reducing the deficit, we have to combine spending cuts with revenue. >> that's kind of an easy-- that seems very solvable. dems want revenue through marginal tax increases on the wealthy. the republicans want entitlement cuts. >> raising tax rates is unacceptable. >> jon: well, let's just check in with the democrats and see where they are at on entitle am reform. >> mr. durbin, the number two man in the senate and other democrats are saying entitlements for this fiscal cliff deal are off the table. >> jon: okay
house deficit reduction package. later, nancy pelosi addresses the fiscal cliff and middle- class tax cuts. tomorrow on ", washington "" robert -- "washington journal," robert van order on the mortgage loan forgiveness. adult'eman on being an with autism. plus, your emails, phone calls, and tweets. >> c-span, created by cable companies and venture 1979, brought to you as a public service by >> president obama talked about the so-called fiscal cliff and his proposal to end the bush era tax cuts. he spoke at a manufacturing facility in hatfield, pennsylvania, for about 25 minutes. >> thank you! [cheers and applause] >> well, good morning, everybody. everybody, please have a seat, have a seat. relax for a second. it is good to see all of you. hello, hatfield! it is good to be back in pennsylvania and it is good to be right here at connects. i want to thank michael airington and the inventor of connects, joel glickman, for hosting me today. where'd they go? stand up so everybody can see you guys. there you go! i just noticed, we got a couple of outstanding members of congress here. chaka
and supporting unspecified revenue hicks to cut the deficit and big business resigned to higher taxes. here is lloyd blankfine. >> we had to lift up the marginal rate. >> norquist's response? >> some of these people have had impure thoughts. no one pulled the trigger and voted for a tax increase. >> to be sure, norquist is still raking in big bucks. according to open secrets.org, he shelled out almost $14 million to defeat democratic opponents in this past election cycle. >> we've run ads to let people know who it taking the pledge and who doesn't. we'll do phones into letting people know who is taking the pledge. >> norquist's big backers are republican operatives, cross roads gps, the superpack led by kingpin karl rove and the center to protect patient rights. closely tied to the ultra conservative cook brothers. they account for a majority of the budget and there's no sign that they're running scared. norquist truly believes that best way to grow the economy is to tame big government. he told me recently he will be vindicated no matter how many politicians break the pledge. what happens
, deficit reduction. not hearing specifically about mortgage interest deduction but hearing about closing the loopholes. republicans say this is what's on the table from the white house. raising marginal tax rates on the very rich. extending both the social security payroll tax break and unemployment benefits for next year. the government wants to -- the white house wants to defer the sequester for a year and then launch this new multi-year stimulus package that would be at least $50 billion last year, infrastructure spending. also get this, a permanent increase in the debt limit, and they would take the debt ceiling approval away from congress. robert reich, do you have any problems with all of these things? >> well, most of them are steps in the right direction. i think that actually taking the debt ceiling approval away from congress sounds radical but it really isn't. that's a technicality. you don't want the debt ceiling ever to be negated. you are don't want congress to ever say no because that's the full faith and credit of the united states. that's what we went through before. a m
crisis. with a budget deficit, the government is forced to cut fuel subsidies. >> everything is very expensive. watch what we do. >> some perspective is important. they have seen the trauma of iraq and syria and they don't want chaos here. peace, andoking for up to look for. there are making problems with the government. we cannot afford problems in georgia. >> islamists promise a boycott. >> whoever wants to distance himself from this political process will not be included. we believe there is political reform and with the participation of everybody, we will broaden the leadership of the government and parliament. >> today's protest was pragmatically peaceful. these people know that they are in for a long struggle. >> they implement serious reform, running the risk of becoming the target of more widespread opposition. >> the stirrings of the arab spring being felt even in jordan. after more than a year and a half, there is no sign of the bloodshed ending in syria. the situation is reaching appalling heights of brutality and violence as government forces continued to crash -- clash w
fund, and the money appears to have helped. the government was able to sink its annual deficit from 32% to 8.5% of gdp, and it is paying much lower interest on government bonds, and the irish economy is growing. only unemployment remains stubbornly high. in october, the jobless rate was still above the eurozone average at 14.7%, but in countries hard hit by the euro crisis, there were even more people out of work, and an increase, and employment is one of 25%. in spain, 26% were one in two young people is out of work. things are not quite that grim in italy, but more and more young people are looking for work. the youth unemployment rate is 36%, the highest since june 2004. >> we have to take a short break, but when we back, december 1 is world aids day. we will be taking a look at the problem of hiv/aids. >> and what is germany going to do with all its nuclear waste? stay with us for that. >> thanks for staying with us. >> welcome back. one of the consequences of the breakdown of public services in the wake of the economic crisis in greece is a sharp spike up people they're infected w
to force congress to deal with the deficit. now senate majority leader harry reid is proposing changes to the filibuster that might make senate lesseesy. right now senators can block motions to proceed which means the senate can't even debate the legislation in question. president obama realizing the stakes for his second term agenda endorsed those changes on tuesday. white house communications director dan pfeiffer said in a state, the president supports sen tor reid's reform the filibuster. he has a chance to change the filibuster with a 51% majority. he is getting close to getting that majority. republicans, meanwhile, are apoplectic. mitch mcconnell has accused reid of throwing a bomb into the senate. john boehner said he will block it if the filibuster is curtailed. all right. let's start at the most basic principle level. before we get into the weeds of senate procedure and the current reform rules on the table, i would like to put forth the proposition that the filibuster itself is a ridiculous thing that we shouldn't have and that if we -- we have come to see it as normal and i
. >> absolutely. >> and that is increasing and guess what, that adds up to the deficit, right? >> david, the problem is deeper than what you are describing. this goes back decades. when you look at entitlement spending over the last half century, it has steadily crept up four percent every year and that includes adjustments for population growth. so what then? you increase taxes four percent every year? that is absurd. at some point we need both parties to come together and tax this entitlement creep. we mention obama ape lot. he hasn't helped the numbers. but when you look at enment spending it goes up under a republican president. he can go in this and blame the republicans. >> i didn't know there was a entitlement creep. maybe i got you wrong. >> it is it an itch. >> and john, what about this. we have a budget if you can call it a budget that includes tax increases and no cuts at all from our treasury security. >> the tax increase aspect is ridickulous. we have a spending problem . you look at entitlements. i think it is i i don't they should exist. we did make promises and so the id
that doubled the tax hikes that he campaigned on and it adds about $150 billion more, not less to the deficit in and new spending. to republicans with that kind of equivalent of lucy and the football and they are laying flat on their backs? >> republicans scoffed at this first foray from the white house. they thought was ridiculous. for the white house it was the first attempt, first specific plan we've seen since the election being put out there. it was frankly a wish list. john boehner acknowledges as much in his comments was that the white house would like to see. if we do get a deal before christmas it won't look anything like this. >> gregg: instead of meeting with members of congress, even day after day and tens of thousands of dollars the president doesn't do that. the president heads back on the campaign trail gives speeches about it. how frustrating is this to some of the folks on capitol hill who do want to sit down and work with him? >> i think it's frustrating to some members of congress, perhaps members of his own party more than anything. if you look at his record he doesn't do
this is the target. $500 billion a year in reduced deficit. and we're going to get there. >> bill: 500 billion a year you would reduce. >> absolutely. >> bill: i would double that i would do a trillion. >> you can't quite get there i think you can get. >> bill: what if i sold rhode island then i could probably get that. [ laughter ] >> bill: chinese would buy it? >> is chafee still going to be government after you sell it. >> bill: who cares. >> he is damaged goods after you took care of him last night. >> bill: i'm trying for a trillion dollars to cut the debt every year. not the deficit. the debt. i'm trying to get enough money in here so that we can go from 16 to 15 to 14, you see? >> we get rid of a trillion dollars very quickly by taking a half trillion a year. >> bill: what you just said is how you get rid of it. you raise the retirement rate for social security for a couple of years. >> medicare as well. >> bill: not for people who are over 45. under 45 or maybe 48. but the people who bought into the system. >> you are already into the details. and we're losing the parameters here. >> bill: i'
as it goes out into the country. are its priorities in this discussion about the deficit, the people's priorities that brought the administration to office and what will they do at some of those meetings as people say, well, we also want to talk about raising the minimum wage. we also want to talk about workers and the condition of work in this country. that stimulus spending, maybe it is not big enough. there is definitely an effort to redo some of the mistakes of the last term. they are in the same peril louse situation. >> we are looking at the $1.6 billion in tax increases. those are the big power moves. does that jive with what people want here? >> these aren't new numbers. these are the numbers that the president originally talked about. the original time two years ago and then a year before that in terms of bringing down the deficit. his plan for bringing down the deficit, which got nothing from boehner. i like the way you are putting this. in the first term, it seemed to me that obama was very conciliatory towards republicans. he wanted to create a grand one and he learned so
took to the road, while republicans warned there's a deadlock in efforts to reach a deficit deal. >> now, of course, santa delivers everywhere. i've been keeping my own naughty and nice lists for washington. >> warner: the president chose a seasonal setting, a toy factory in hatfield, pennsylvania, and holiday imagery to press again for extending tax cuts for the middle class. >> if congress does nothing, every family in america will see their income taxes automatically go up on january 1. i mean, i... i'm assuming that doesn't sound too good to you. >> no. >> that's sort of like the lump of coal you get for christmas. that's a scrooge christmas. >> warner: in washington, republicans portrayed the road trip as so much humbug, at a time, they said, when negotiations are going nowhere. >> there's a stalemate. let's not kid ourselves. >> warner: house speaker john boehner said republicans remain willing to raise revenues, but not by raising tax rates. and he charged the white house isn't negotiating in good faith. >> the day after the election, i said the republican majority would a
and the deficit, i got everything i wanted, the place is a mess and look, i got reelected. so, what's so hard about me continuing to doing that and blaming it on them. obviously, i'm very good at that and that's base clr where he's going here and the republicans i think are not very good poker players, they're signaled they're relucks tennant to go over the cliff. if you're in this showdown, i is a, come on, bring it. >> paul: they will get blamed if that happens and the president is signaling that. that wouldn't be a pleasant outcome for them. you're saying they should suggest to the president we had he' be willing to do that and maybe he'll give at the end? >> yeah, i think they have to show that they are it, that he's in a negotiation and that he has to give and that they're willing to give and if they just say, look, we're so afraid of getting blamed for that, of course, he's going to roll over them. >> kim, where do you think the republicans are? where should they go here? do they have real options, any other options other than maybe just giving the president in the end, what he wants? >
's a small deal, it's going to be a sign that we're not going to get the deficit reduction that we need. >> and that's the challenge for the president. because, yes, he does have all the leverage. we talked about that. he won the election of course. but this is a test of leadership, and the american public does not want to go over that cliff because, by the way, they want the tax cut for the middle class to remain in place. that's the ultimate cliff there and the bottom line is we don't want those to expire. gwen: as we approach it we begin to try to read the tea leaves. he brings the c.e.o.'s to the white house and they had the goldman sachsco guy saying i'm pretty optimistic we'll come up with a deal. and others think we'll good over the cliff. what do we read into that? >> there's a rule that denny has earth enunciated and people are outraged. it's a majority institution. the speaker is not going to put something on the floor that doesn't get a majority of the majority. if john byner puts something on the floor that raises taxes, they're going to explode. >> you could do it in two st
and important projects as much as we can. at the state level, as we face this huge budget deficit as well to make sure there is flexibility in spending at the local level. but i absolutely think that we need revenue measures that come on the ballot, and voters have to be thinking about ensuring that we have enough revenue so that we maintain infrastructure, the building and maintenance of the streets and buildings and even a kind of parts of the coat -- coast. the need to make sure infrastructure is there and also that we have money that -- to protect the critical safety net for seniors and young children and families and the most vulnerable in our communities as well, but i think those are key questions as the difficult budget for our city comes forward. i will be working with a coalition of family-based and community-based groups and seniors to ensure we protect our community-based services for seniors. >> what are your ideas on dealing with the issue of homelessness? >> i think homelessness has been this structural problem, not just in our city but other metropolitan areas, and i think
you're at a deficit on the latino and the african-american vote they have which isn't sizable but every vote counts. so, if you then toss out the fiscal conservatives, then you lose a lot of the oriented versions of the republicans. they're going to have to try to work in a coalition and i suspect it's probably going to be the fiscal side that ultimately the republicans waffle on because if you look demgraphically at african-american voters, they are less inclined to believe that absolute limited government works. i think the gop is going to have to go more towards a small government, economic populous message. >> as funny as it sounds, you were very clear about the ambiguity this week on redstate.com. you're not sure what republicans in congress stands for as it relates to fiscal issues. where would you like to see them go? >> i would like to see the gop be a limited government party. it makes the case that spending from washington doesn't actually help people. the younger voters actually think it does. the gop needs to make the case it doesn't. but, in particular, i think re
with a planned deficit reduction by 2013. these cuts are what we refer to as sequestration. this would mean an across the board cut of between 7% and 10% of all defense and non-defense federal spending irrespective of policy or its impact on everyday people. these cuts would be absolutely devastating to our national and local economies. our -- show that sequestration will reduce federal funding direct to san francisco by at least 26.5 million dollars a year, every single year. we would see over $5 million of cut to education, and almost $3 million of cuts from public housing. san francisco's allocation of medicare would be cut by $2 million. funding for the wic workforce program would lose almost $5 million. there would be a $1 million cut to housing services for people with hiv and aids and more than $1 million cut to the community development block grant program. ladies and gentlemen, this is our safety net. and our safety net's already strained by years of state cuts and it cannot sustain these additional reductions in federal funding. in addition to the cuts i have just detailed, there
if things start to change and in fact, the underlying real problem, the growing deficit on the path to greece, the goal gets worse once we kick the can away. that will be the overriding probleming not the slowing economy not people spending money, but sure, that might not happen in the first two months, but it will eventually happen if we keep kicking down the can. we want to prove to the world that we have a solution and if it takes a few months to get there and higher taxes for a while, big deal, we will get there. that's got to be the plan not just the same nonsense. >> yeah, but larry, that's part of your point, but jonas says we're not in a bad recession, we're certainly not in a good recovery. and if we just keep falling little bit by little bit, maybe as much as jump off the cliff, but it's certainly a slippery slope. >> brenda, the damage is already being done. we saw it in november retail sales and companies delaying activity already and we know the ratings agencies are minutes away, we're right to fix the problem in the long run than making a bandaid short-term deal. it do
there will be deficits that we'll be facing, in the coming years. we talked about the mandated cost block[u&,9- getting some additional dollars from that. and then the budget projections were bleak. they continue to be bleak. so once again, we're not -- we're still in a position where we'll be cutting and modifying and adjusting for next year. giving. >> who's first? commissioner wynns. >> commissioner wynns: i just mandated cost block grant be distributed to all the board members and hopefully at some time in the future we could have a discussion about that, because how this is going to work, this is another new change to the funding structure. it would be good for us all to know before we do the budget next year, to understand that better, i think. thank you. >> can i just encourage, if you haven't received this, mr. lee, all of the board members we asked for your input on what you'd like to hear. coming up we'd like to do our budget committee earlier rather than later knowing there are additional cuts we have to focus on and to set our priorities. we also have had several discussions around this pos
a budget -- three years with a trillion dollar deficit. so we are talking about a problem that needs to be solved with massive spending cuts on the table. neil: i don't know what is really happening behind the scenes. but i do know that these overturesand hands that you get from the white house that the president is open and willing to consir spending cuts -- i don't know what the truth is. the other thing on this middle ground, the tax thing -- letting the difference of 37 or 38%. giving the appearance that there is a middle ground being found here, do you believe that? >> if you look at the middle ground and what is reported, they are giving specifics on taxes, but not stunning. they are saying that those tax cuts will happen 10 to 20 years from now. that is saying that congress at that time, 10 years from now, is going to agree with the spending cuts. listen, we are in this situation because coogress could not even agree on spending cuts your way when the sequester was going into effect and they failed as a super committee in november. they can't even agree on spending cuts. how d
deficit everybody in washington agreed they should come together to make the tough decisions that had to be made. something that would provide short-term stimulus but long-term debt relief. after all we all knew something had to be done. the health of our nation depended on it. washington surprise, surprise, decided to delay for the umpteenth time kicking the proverbial can down the road. then the campaign really heated up and we were told we would have our sweet relief after the election. finally the story went voters would provide clarity, a choice played out across the country that would deliver the elusive answers. what are we getting? endless posturing game playing and the same rhetoric over and over again. both sides standing up and preening themselves campaign style as if they expect the public to pay attention and give deference to the repetition of the same ideas. i for one are tired of it. americans have been poked and prodded, pulled left and right at the same time and used in some cases abused. the campaign is over. we have had our fill of the various white house represent
to do anything on medicare or medicaid when that's one of the biggest drivers of our budget deficit." there's the president, on record saying it is untenable. >> sean: this is in your book. >> this is in the book. >> sean: your conclusion about the president in your book was he had an opportunity to lead and he did not lead. john boehner was willing to go further than i as a conservative would have liked. we discussed that. how does the president, planning a vacation in hawaii for 20 days. the president sends geithner to meet with the republicans yesterday. >> i don't think that's fair. >> sean: he's a tax cheat. >> he made a mistake and he paid and everyone -- [ talking over each other ] >> sean: i never cheated on my taxes i promise. obama would have caught me by now. look at his proposal, 1.6 trillion tax cut. increase rates on the wealthy only. new stimulus program 150 billion. and he wants a blank cheque that. is not a serious proposal bob. >> it is not. you talk to people in the real world, not in washington, but in the real world, they say the numbers and how this is done, i
in these negotiations or in terms of reducing this $1.1 trillion deficit if you don't do something about these entitlements. so everyone's kind of waiting, when will the president come forward with those recommendations? >> if i could just jump in really quick, one of the problems with entitlement cuts is they don't produce a lot of savings in the first ten years. >> that's true. that's true. >> a lot of the things ryan proposed are going to be phased in gradually. if we're going to be obsessively focused on the ratio between revenue and spending, then republicans are going to be in for some disappointment because all the things they want on entitlements basically phase in. this is consistent what they said about not wanting to change things for people over 55. and the fact that even paul ryan and mitt romney ran away from entitlement cuts in paul ryan's budget in the last election i think is a sign of where the american public is. they do want the rich to pay their fair share in taxes, but they really don't like a lot of the entitlement cuts. >> that's a fair point. that's a fair point.
, take a deep breath and take the medicine. it will fix the problem and the deficit problem as long as everything in the fiscal cliff happens. as long as sequestration happens it will hurt defense. tax rate goes up. eventually you will get someone out, to get that president out and get president who wants lower tax rates and congress that wants the lower tax rate and maybe a senate. it would hurt dramatically. best time to do it is now. >> andrea: there are two schools of thought here. one if you follow twitter or watch republicans who are on the pundit circle, they say let them go off cliff and let obama own that. there is another one that says just let him have what he wants and then when the economy nose dives he will have to own it. republicans are going to get blamed anyway. do you feel strong about either one of those? >> dana: not necessarily. i do think i see in "washington post," headline, obama offers plan for cliff. plan to be in quotes. the thing that amazes me and the media lets it happen. for eight years or longer now. i had to defend how many times people said on the
and rack up massive deficits and ontinuing higher taxes without any plan that bears that out. remember that his budget hikes taxes and still spends $47 trillion over the next 10 years. gerri: to that point, you look at the approval rating now going down for the first time since the election at 49%. i think it tells you something. maybe american people are looking at this and it looks a whole lot like campaigning to me. it is like the election never happen. we are still campaigning on the campaign trail.l. today in pennsylvania, talking about what needs to be done. shouldn't he be in the white house hosting the negotiations himself instead of sending his foot soldier, timothy geithner, the fellow who put together the biggest bailout in american history? talking about someone who is going to be good at negotiating on our taxpayer dollars. i would think that timothy geithner s not the man we met i would agree with you. this is actually shocking. i'm going to say that the president won, no contest there. can we get past the campaigning? are really just shows a lack of seriousness. gerri:
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 69 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)